Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
RFC 1902 - 7.8.1. Relation between INDEX and AUGMENTS clauses

Top: Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
Up: Requests For Comments
Up: RFC 1902
Up: 7. Mapping of the OBJECT-TYPE macro
Up: 7.8. Mapping of the AUGMENTS clause
Prev: 7.8. Mapping of the AUGMENTS clause
Next: 7.9. Mapping of the DEFVAL clause

### 7.8.1. Relation between INDEX and AUGMENTS clauses

When defining instance identification information for a conceptual table:

1. If there is a one-to-one correspondence between the conceptual rows of this table and an existing table, then the AUGMENTS clause should be used.

2. Otherwise, if there is a sparse relationship between the conceptual rows of this table and an existing table, then an INDEX clause should be used which is identical to that in the existing table. For example, the relationship between RFC 1573's ifTable and a media-specific MIB which extends the ifTable for a specific media (e.g., the dot3Table in RFC 1650), is a sparse relationship.

3. Otherwise, if no existing objects have the required syntax and semantics, then auxiliary objects should be defined within the conceptual row for the new table, and those objects should be used within the INDEX clause for the conceptual row.

Next: 7.9. Mapping of the DEFVAL clause

Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
RFC 1902 - 7.8.1. Relation between INDEX and AUGMENTS clauses